Posted!

Join the Nation's Conversation

This conversation is moderated according to USA TODAY's
community rules.
Please read the rules before joining the discussion.

Which travel fees are really necessary?

Bill McGee, Special for USA TODAY
Published 7:04 a.m. ET May 11, 2016

The fuel costs of carry-ons are negligible compared to the handling costs of checked bags. But several U.S. airlines — such as Allegiant, Frontier and Spirit — charge for carry-ons.(Photo: Getty Images/iStockphoto)

Your responses were overwhelming. Some agreed Greyhound’s add-on is the worst, some voted for a variety of other travel fees detailed below, and a few defended the travel industry’s “unbundled” pricing. Which got me thinking — for all the ink spilled about fees, it would make sense to categorize them in ways that help consumers understand what’s driving these charges.

Using your input, I’ve tried to rank fee categories across the travel industry.

I’m never surprised when readers find ingenious ways to circumvent higher travel costs. Take Greyhound’s Gift Ticket fee, which as I noted unduly affects economically challenged travelers, as well as parents and other relatives of college students and military personnel. In addition to my suggestions, here are additional ideas on avoiding it:

• Several readers suggested reserving tickets online and paying with cash at Greyhound’s partner, 7-Eleven stores. As one reader noted: “Clunky, but it worked.” Another also suggested taking photos of the tickets in case they’re lost or mutilated.

• Others recommended charging alternatives, such as designating riders as authorized users on credit cards, a particularly helpful suggestion for younger travelers (note that this doesn’t work for debit cards, which I had used for my transaction).

• Finally, I had recommended Amtrak as an alternative to Greyhound, but several readers noted the Gift Ticket fee isn’t charged by rival bus lines, so it pays to comparison shop ALL modes of transportation.

What certainly came through was an awful lot of reader anger over travel fees. My theory on this anger focuses on two issues:

• Overall, travel companies have been ham-handed in implementing fees, particularly for services and products that were complimentary for nearly 100 years. In other words, conditioning customers something is free and then charging for it is never popular.

• It’s becoming increasingly difficult to determine fee amounts and total pricing prior to booking, and consumers are losing patience with sticker shock when paying for travel.

Making sense of fees

Here’s an attempt at ranking travel fees:

• Legitimate cost to supplier.

As a consumer, you may not like paying an airline for headsets, a car rental firm for GPS or a hotel for breakfast, but there’s no denying those products and services cost money. There are plenty of other examples of fees that represent genuine costs to the industry — even if those fees are often much higher than such costs.

And yet there’s virtually no uniformity in these various sectors — airlines, hotels, car rentals, cruises — on “average” fees, and such charges are increasing constantly. Consider SmarterTravel.com’s airline fee guide; charges range from $0 to $100 for the same service. Obviously, some companies don’t charge at all for certain “extras” — Southwest, for example, remains the only U.S. carrier not charging for first AND second checked bags. In short, consumers are annoyed because there are virtually no fee benchmarks and their confusion is worsened by the lack of pricing transparency.

Several readers felt I didn’t understand unbundled pricing, the theory consumers should only pay for what they use. I understand it. Yet why hasn’t such thinking spilled over into other businesses? Consider dining. The average restaurant provides dozens of condiments and extras free of charge. Why doesn’t anyone complain those refusing ketchup are “subsidizing” the ketchup users, or those drinking black coffee should receive discounts not given to those using cream and sugar? What strikes me is an awful lot of folks parrot airline executive talking points without applying the same principles to other industries.

• No cost to supplier.

The most divisive fees are those generating virtually no cost to travel companies, and are simply milking more revenue. I would classify Greyhound’s Gift Ticket fee this way, since no other travel company — or ANY company, to my knowledge — imposes a similar charge.

There are plenty of others; as recently noted, airlines increasingly are charging more for the same-size seats near windows or aisles. We’re not talking about larger or better seats — we’re talking about the same basic economy seats. Free-market advocates claim that’s pure supply and demand, but that doesn’t mean passengers like it. The same goes for exorbitant fees to change airline itineraries.

Meanwhile, many readers wrote about hotel “resort fees.” You know a fee has annoyed millions when it generates its own URL — KillResortFees.com provides the background. Back in 2012, the Federal Trade Commission investigated “drip pricing” in lodging and even sent “warning letters” to some chains, noting resort fees are often mandatory, running $30 per night. Last year, all this added up to an additional $2.5 billion for U.S. hotels.

But as consumer advocates note, the resort fee trickery has only worsened. And readers noted similar trends are taking place in the timeshare industry, with charges such as “gift certificate” fees popping up.

I’d also classify carry-on bags this way. While handling and transporting checked baggage requires personnel and equipment, carry-ons eliminate such costs. Yes, as a former airline dispatcher I used to calculate estimated weights for passengers and their baggage (and increase the totals in the winter months), but from an airline perspective the real costs associated with baggage are in handling, not fuel burn. The fuel costs of carry-ons are negligible compared to the handling costs of checked bags. But several U.S. airlines — such as Allegiant, Frontier and Spirit — charge for carry-ons.

• Passing costs of business onto customers.

There are standard maintenance costs for any organization operating large fleets of vehicles; every taxi company and police department knows this. Yet in recent years car rental companies have unilaterally decided YOU the customer should pay to maintain their fleets, by opting for additional — and costly — roadside service packages. Fair is fair: If the renter is responsible for damage or repairs, that’s one thing. But why should you pay for the breakdown of a car someone else hasn’t maintained?

It’s about transparency

Perhaps the best way to consider travel fees is by asking a few simple questions when you get hit with additional charges. Am I paying for something that’s costing the travel company? Is that cost reasonable? And is that charge an extra or a baked-in cost of doing business? The more we analyze and clarify what we’re paying, the easier it will be to seek solutions.

As noted above, sticker shock induces anger, and even major airlines go to great lengths to hide the full and complete costs of their fees. There’s been talk in Washington recently — on both the regulatory and legislative sides — of addressing such issues. In March, Senators Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced the Forbidding Airlines from Imposing Ridiculous (FAIR) Fees Act, which assails “nickel-and-diming consumers” and calls for fees to align with the actual costs of doing business.

Wouldn’t that be a refreshing change?

Bill McGee, a contributing editor to Consumer Reports and the former editor of Consumer Reports Travel Letter, is an FAA-licensed aircraft dispatcher who worked in airline operations and management for several years. Tell him what you think of his latest column by sending him an email at travel@usatoday.com. Include your name, hometown and daytime phone number, and he may use your feedback in a future column.